About your Search

20130201
20130209
STATION
MSNBCW 23
CSPAN 22
MSNBC 21
CSPAN2 11
FOXNEWS 10
FBC 7
CNBC 2
CNN 2
CNNW 2
KNTV (NBC) 2
KQED (PBS) 2
KRCB (PBS) 2
WRC (NBC) 2
KGO (ABC) 1
( more )
LANGUAGE
English 128
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 128 (some duplicates have been removed)
deficit will be under $1 trillion for the first time since president obama took office. the c.b.o. also estimates the economy will grow 1.4% this year with unemployment remaining around 8%. c.b.o. director sat down with reporters this afternoon to discuss the economic and budget forecast. >> hello. thank you all for coming. i'm the director of the budget office. c.b.o. just released its outlook for the federal budget and the economy over the next decade. i'd like to tell you a little bit about if and then my colleagues and i will be happy to take your questions. our analysis shows that the united states continues to face very large economic and budget challenges. under current law we expect that the unemployment rate will remain above 7.5% through next year. that would make 2014 the sixth year in a row with unemployment so high. the longest such period in 70 years. also under current law, we expect the budget deficits over the next decade would total about $7 trillion. with deficits so high, the federal debt held by the public would remain a larger percentage of g.d.p. as in any year be
the real question here is, how do we reduce our deficits in a way that does not hurt the economy right now, but does make sure that as the economy improves that public spending is not -- and deficit spending is not squeeze the out by private investment. for the last couple years the problem has been opposite. we have seen less private investment, so the moneys the federal government has spent have been very important to helping the economy from going into free fall. . there is no doubt that we have to deal with the balanced approach and that's where the debate lies in how we should do that. again, our republican colleagues have said no to the balanced approach. they said no to the plan that we offered to prevent the sequester. they wouldn't allow a vote on the plan we offered to prevent the sequester that's going to hit on march 1 and which our republican colleagues in statement after statement on this floor have said is going to hurt the economy and which we know from the last quarter's economic report is already hurting the economy just because businesses are anticipating the possibility
to face and i think much more important is the very large, long run deficit that a thing all of us want our policymakers to come together and address how we're going to do with it. i think that's unfortunate will have to be front and center in the next year coming up with that. i sure hope it is. >> let's see, i think first thing just to mind ourselves out is that the impact of it president on the short-term macro economy is almost always exaggerated. presidents can have a big impact on the economy in the medium term and long run, largely -- and while the fed has cut aid to help they can should have a much bigger short-term effect, we immediately looked to the white house and said what are you going to be about the economy right now? dr. romer and i would have to go on tv and there is points and talk about the job supports and what would happen over the course of the next month and the thing that is so frustrating note in fact not much that you were doing action has a direct result what will happen over the course of the next month. i think it is interesting how the debate has shifted.
is president obama really cares about the deficit. if there is something he noticed in the first two years when the economic crisis had to be front and center, the thing he wanted to deal with was the long-run deficit. the idea that he went on a spending binge if you don't make threats like that is crazy. the evidence is there that he put spending cuts on the table. he asked them for them to be paired with tax increases as well. there is more good will than people realize. more agreement that we have such a big budget problem that will we're going to fire on all cylinders. we have to cut spending. frankly, we have raise more revenue. >> you're listening to the california program and our speakers are economic experts. we are discussing national, regional, and global economic challenges. you can find video online. there's a series of questions around employment and job growth. what what is your outlook on job growth? >> i will start. i think -- i will say i was here last year and i'm more optimistic this year than last year. we made a significant amount of progress. it looks like housing prices h
of the administration, the deficit tripled, the previous record high deficit in this country, to $1.4 trillion. $1.3 trillion in f.y. 2010. $1.3 trillion in 2011, $1.2 trillion in f.y. 2012. and, mr. speaker, there's no plan that the administration has produced to get us from where we are, fiscal irresponsibility, to a point in the future of fiscal responsibility. mr. speaker, we've been doing our part here in the house, we've been proud to work together across the aisle in order to pass budgets that tackle those hard challenges that are ahead of us. if you go and read the president's comments, mr. speaker, you'll see that he recognized the challenges are hard. the question is, are we going to deal with those or not? i hold here, mr. speaker, a speech that the president made to the democratic national convention on september 6, 2012. where he said this, i will use the money that we're no longer spending on war to pay down our debt and put more people back to work. and my notes here said it was followed by extended cheers and applause. i suspect my friend from massachusetts supports that spirit who
" is next. host: the federal deficit is expected to dip below one trillion. the news comes as republicans and democrats face a march 1 deadline to avoid billions in across-the-board spending cuts. the pentagon announced it will offer benefits to same-sex couples. in the senate is wrapping up work on the violence against women act. and the house will vote on a bill requiring the president to offer a plan to balance the federal budget in 10 years. good morning. we begin with your take on the leaked white paper from the white house just fine drone strikes on u.s. citizens overseas. nbc news reported on the memo monday night and it has gotten lots of reaction in washington. what are your thoughts? call -- we want to get your thoughts on social media as well on twitter or facebook. or send us an e-mail. we will get your thoughts in a moment. first, josh gerstein is joining us on the phone. here's your headline -- what was this memo? guest: this is a white paper that looks like it was derived from some confidential legal opinions that the opinions -- opinions that the justice department wrote t
economy back to work and create jobs, jobs, jobs. that's what this is about. our deficit has been coming down and the patient approach is to recognize that we actually have time. we should bring the deficit down, but we have time. we should take the cuts off the table and think about how to get the economy going. if people work again, we are on the road to solving the problem. >> to that point and looking at the cuts you have been pointing out to head start and cuts to wic, the women, infant and children nutritional assistant program, they are penny wise and foolish and may be making things worse in the long run. >> i'm glad you raised that, crystal. if you think about the single mom working 12 hours a day and her paycheck does not take her to the end of the month on food. what she realizes and has been a responsible mom, but realizes after she makes the decision to have her child not have an abortion is that her paycheck is not going to help her feed her infant. the women infant children program not only feeds these families, it also teaches them about nutrition and how to be healther a
people like laura tyson writing columns calling for the need for a plan for faster growth, not deficit reduction. what is the president -- i know you've talked about how all the president's plans envision job creation, but what does the president tell his advisors when he sees these signs of a sluggish recovery? what is he asking in the way of things to speed recovery, create jobs and stimulate growth? >> i'll go to the narrow question first. every time the president meets with his economic advisors to discuss policy proposals and refinements to existing policies, the focus is on job creation and economic growth. and that includes when we have discussions about deficit reduction. as i've said many times and as the president has made clear, deficit reduction is not a goal unto itself. it is a means to, if done right , the desired goal, which is greater growth and greater job creation. as part of an overall economic policy. i would note that today's jobs figures and the revisions that we saw in previous months' jobs figures mean that over 35 months we have created 6.1 million private sec
that we need higher fuel tax, and we can use that either to reduce the deficit or to pay for something else. it was designed -- or intended -- whether it has done so successfully or not, it was done to pay for infrastructure. >> absolutely. we are not real happy about that. >> john, what are you hoping for next week? >> for some reason, i have not been consulted on that. the president in the campaign said he was 4 and all of the above energy policy, so let's have some announcements that support that -- he was for an " all of the above" energy policy. let's move forward with the things that you need to do to accomplish that policy. i would say that we would also -- i would like to see stop this discussion about taxing the industry and trying to characterize it as subsidies, which is simply not true, and i would like to see more opportunities in terms of where we can open up areas that are off-limits right now. all those combined can generate an enormous amount of opportunity for the economy right when we need it. >> i will just mention a couple of things. i think lenders have been reall
the budget deficit will drop below $1 trillion for the first time during obama's presidency. the congressional budget office which assumes that federal spending cuts will go into effect march 1st says the government will run a deficit of $845 billion this year compared to last year's $1.1 trillion shortfall. but the cbo's ten-year outlook predicts those improvements will not last. it warns that an aging population will drive up entitlement spending and rising interest rates will put the debt at unsustainable levels. if current laws remain in place, debt by 2023 only ten years from now will equal 77% of gdp. that's roughly double the 39% average seen over the past 40 years. >>> and president obama is asking lawmakers to take quick action as a march 1st deadline approaches that will trigger deep spending cuts. "the new york times" writes this morning that "mr. obama, who missed a deadline this week to submit his annual budget to congress, acknowledged on tuesday that a broader deficit agreement is unlikely to be reached by the march deadline. he provided no details about the t
. republicans are winning the battle, wouldn't you say, when it comes to balancing? over two-thirds of deficit reduction has come from cuts to domestic programs, and it's not exactly fair. but now the house progressive caucus has come out with what they call the balancing act. it's a common-sense plan to reduce the deficit by closing tax loopholes and cutting wasteful defense spending. here is the chart of the plan. there is $1.7 trillion in new revenue. the $1.7 trillion in spending cuts is still there. this looks like a much fairer chart than the current system, don't you think? and it's estimated to reduce the deficit by $3.3 trillion. remember, we're trying to hit $4 trillion. so we're getting closer. the plan ends tax loopholes for yachts and for jets. it reduces the corporate meal and entertainment deduction to 25%. you can't write off the whole dinner anymore. it ends fossil fuel subsidies for oil companies that are raking in massive profits. exxonmobil, you know what their profit was? $44 billion in 2012. the last thing they need right now is your tax dollars as subsidy. the balancing
. >> they need to make cost-cutting measures. i mean, they've been running in the deficit for quite a while. >> you know, those folks look like just hard-working knowledgeable americans that care about the country. but they're so wrong. it's not about e-mails and it's not about ecommerce. it's about the republican party destroying the middle class in this country. and i wonder how many of those folks right there who don't rely on the post office, how they're going to feel when their netflix deliveries are delayed. what? they're not here for saturday night family movies? that's right. people definitely take the post office for granted. most everything americans know about the post office is absolutely wrong. they haven't paid attention to the story. and into the mainstream media, here we go. this morning, the "washington post" is telling people that the post office suffered tens of billions of dollars in losses in recent years with the advent of the internet and ecommerce. really? plenty of other media outlets. well, they are taking their information directly from the republican talking poin
apiece saying how the trust deficit is hurting the economy. what are you trying to say about that? guest: we usually do not talk about trust deficits. talk about trade, budget deficits, things we can measure. i'm talking about a breakdown of trust in american society, in particular in the institutions that make our economy go. when you look at measures of trust from surveys like a gallup or the pugh institute -- the pew institute, or even newspapers, congress, large corporations, banks, public schools, they have all been going down for many years. for a lot of them, this decline in trust was intensified leading up to and going into the financial crisis. there are a lot of reasons for these things we can talk about. what we were trying to get at in the story that -- is that this matters to the economy, and trust breaks down. there was nobel prize-winning economist who 40 years ago said that every commercial transaction has within it an element of trust. when you trust your counter party, you're more likely to engage in a transaction. when trust begins to fray, and people become suspicious
the deficit instead of worried about wall street. this consumer financial bureau, the protection bureau, set up under elizabeth warpen, this focus on regulating banks the reality that we had been raided by wall street, that all of that got turned around so that instead, it somehow became a govpt deficit problem when it was never that. >> and it was that deregulation that caused us to have a problem. and dana, if we go back, because a lot of people forget where we came from and how we were able to overcome some insurmountable odds to get where we are today even though we have a long way to go. if you go back to when president obama came into aufsz office, 2009, on the eve of february 2009 jobs report, which turned out to be the worst in 34 years, the president called for action on the stimulus package. let me show you what the president said. >> the time for talk is over. the time for action is now. because we know that if we do not act, a bad situation will become dramatically worse. and i refuse to let that happen. we can't delay and we can't go back to the same, worn out ideas that let d u
about deficits, we are buying in to the right wing mantra somehow deficits are killing the economy. look at great britain and doing with their austerity plans and doesn't add up. i'm much more of the mind to be proactively looking at infrastructure investment like many of the business advisers told president obama should happen. people from commerce, from industry. i get it. that won't happen as long as house republicans are dead set against it. and what we're left with is unfortunately in my view a detente to put the discussion in the frame the republicans want. what about deficits? we have a jobs crisis in this country. not a deficit crisis. to me, the whole conversation has been pushed to the right further than it should be. >> and karen, on a last note, in anticipation of the president's speech, the white house released numbers on the people affected by the cuts. i believe around 600,000, between 600,000 and 800,000 suffering as a result of cuts to food stamps and other program that is people need to survive these days and at least some of the analysis out there, democrats feel that
with smarter spending reductions to bring down the deficit. we can do it in a gradual way so that there is less of an impact. these deductions that certain folks can take advantage of, the average person cannot. not everyone has access to cayman island accounts, the average person does not have access to carry interest income, where they wind up paying a much lower rate on the billions that they earned. we want to make sure that the whole system is fair and transparent and that we are reducing our deficit in a way that does not hamper growth and reduce the kinds of strategies that we need in order to make sure that we are creating a strong middle-class. host: jim from south carolina, on the republican line, good morning. caller: how are you? host: well, thank you. caller: you keep mentioning and hearing people talking about pensions, but pensions are just invested the same way that 401k is. stocks and bonds. people with pensions lost money as well. i heard cases where people were not going to get as much money. if someone is manages their 401k, i do not know, it needs to be managed properly and
with a record debt and deficit, threat of global warming, threat of global poverty, of pandemics, of national security challenges like continuing war on terrorism, the instability of iran and north korea, rising powers, turmoil across the middle east, turmoil in north africa, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the growing threat of cyberattacks. how we confront these problems, how we deal with these challenges will in many ways determine that future course of america. it will determine whether the united states will be a leader in the 21st century or whether we will be just another failed empire in history. to succeed we will depend on the resilience of our economy, the strength of our diplomatic and military institutions and above all, the effectiveness of our political system that underpins in many ways what we do as a country. and that brings me to what i see as perhaps the most urgent task facing this nation and facing all of us and that is overcoming the partisan dysfunction in congress that poses a threat to our quality of life, to our national security, to our economy
the economy is in a recession or if it it's sagging, then you need deficit spending to get it moving. republicans used to agree with that. even in 2007 and 2008, they were proposing different stimulus measures. they no longer agree with the idea that they get the economy moving in a rough time. so maybe you have to actually have some spending cuts go into effect and see the effect on the economy for them to recognize the fact that oh, yes, if we take this money out of the economy, the economy will go down. that's what happened last quarter. if you hit the pentagon and if you hit domestic spending there's no question that the economy will retreat. so maybe they actually have to see that happen and then there will be some type of political reckoning and a turnaround and we can talk rationally about how to get this economy going again and create jobs. >> of course the president insisted -- and he talked about this yesterday -- he thinks we have to stop lurching from crisis to crisis. >> we continue to have these self-inflicted crisis here in washington that suddenly leads everybody to t
the deficit. all by honoring the wish of 2/3 of americans to respect states' rights for marijuana just like we do for alcohol. i would invite my colleagues to join this effort in developing a marijuana policy that makes sense for america today. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina, mr. coble, for five minutes. mr. coble: i thank the speaker. mr. speaker, january is the traditional month in which new year's resolutions are developed. i'm suggesting that president obama and mrs. boim adopt a resolution -- mrs. obama adopt a resolution. it appears to me, mr. speaker, regard air force one very casually and i believe on some occasions two planes, at least two planes go to the same destination. air force one, mr. speaker, belongs to president and mrs. obama. but air force one also belongs to the american taxpayer. and i would welcome a new year's resolution that would provide generous lace of all future air force one dispatches with prudence, discipline and last but certainly not least fiscal austerity. america's taxpayers will be
to lower the devers, but americans do not -- to lower the deficit, but americans do not support sacrificing real spenged cuts for more tax hikes. the president's sequester should be replaced with spending cuts and reforms that put us on a path to balance a budget over the next 10 years. the american people believe that the tax question has been settled. they know the president called for a balanced approach to the debt. combination of revenues and spending cuts, and they know he's gotten his revenue. the american people do not believe the president will use further tax revenues to lower the debt. and haven't seen this president attempt to spend his way into prosperity over the last four years, they know he'll spend it. the president doesn't believe we have a spending problem. he general winly believes the government -- genuinely believes the government spending causes economic growth. if that were true, the economy today would be thriving. it isn't thriving. the unemployment rate is still nearly 8% and rising. small businesses like the one i ran are struggling. middle class families, those
times" economist argued why the u.s. should spend now and worry about deficit reduction later. here it is. >> dashing spending when you still have depressed economy is really destructive. it's probably even counterproductive even in purely fiscal terms. we should be sustaining government spending until we have a stronger economic recovery. >> this is not a hard call. as long as we have 4 million people who have been unemployed for more than a year, this is not a time to be worrying about reducing the budget deficit. give me something that looks more like a normal employment situation and i'll become a deficit hawk but not now. >> do you subscribe to that, jared? or is that too extreme? >> not at all. i think paul's exactly right. paul and i share the following thing. we're deficit doves in a down economy, and deficit hawks in a strong economy. at a time like this, what you really need is faster growth. by the way, not only will that help put more people to work, but it will actually help reduce your budget deficit ironically because those people will be working, paying taxes, they w
of a man, but he actually tripled the deficit and debt and expanded the size of government to or proportions, the same as george bush and republicans always blamed democrats, even though clinton and obama both have lower the deficit if you look at the treasury's website for every fiscal year. every single republican from nixon to george bush as we expanded the deficit greatly. the congress didn't change. it is just the president, but it's always blamed on congress. whenever credit given, they want all the credit, none of the responsibility. republicans will say divisive things. zero, this birth certificate or you're not american enough for denver. >> guest: three things. as a general matter, members of those party blame the other party. president obama more than any in my lifetime has landed the republican party and generally been whining or can need more excuses than any president. he seemed as if he couldn't give a speech for a while without claiming everything, including athletes foot on george w. bush. that gets tiresome after a while. but the criteria is claiming the o
, he talked about the economy. when it comes to tackling the nation's deficit, president obama said sunday in an interview with cbs news there needs to be revenue involved. and it sounds like he might be interested in going after people like mitt romney. >> there is no doubt we need additional revenue coupled with smart spending reductions in order to bring down our deficit. and we can do it in a gradual way so that it doesn't have a huge impact. and as i said, when you look at some of these deductions that certain folks are able to take advantage of, the average person can't take advantage of them. the average person doesn't have access to cayman island accounts. the average person doesn't have access to carried interest income where they end up paying a much lower rate on billions of dollars that they've earned. so we just want to make sure that the whole system is fair. >> all right. steve, help me out here. i think the democrats are holding a losing hand if they come back and ask for more taxes. they talk about raising tax rates on anybody. but if we're talking about closing loo
out of washington to get our deficits under control. hopefully, we do not have to many quarters where we end up in negative territory. this is not an economy growing six percent and can hinder those bibles easily. host: magnolia, texas, david, better. caller: [indiscernible]we are doing great here. i noticed the super bowl is forming dollars per minute. everything is packed. all of the football stadiums. i do not see any recession. host: you said you are doing better why? caller: i live 15 miles from where they are building the number one country in the world. we are getting roads. it is unbelievable around here. we have job signs everywhere. as far as the savings, when interest rates are 1.5%, who will put their money in the bank? bernanke wants you to put it in stocks. that is why there is no interest rate. i took my money for years ago when i bought those rifles. i have made so much money on them. it is unbelievable. host: he mentioned social security. there is a category about the social safety net. guest: we use the term government social benefits to cover quite a few different p
in my view are willing to basically deficit spend and run us into a fiscal problem. republicans are unwilling to touch revenue so say let -- let's deficit spend and democrats are unwilling to address government spending so they deficit spend. both sides which is why this country does not trust washington. >> i want to get quickly to another issue, chuck hagel's confirmation hearing this week. not even the white house would defend his performance. here's a piece of it. >> i support the president's strong position on containment, as i said. if i said that, meant to say that i -- obviously his position on containment, we don't have a position on containment. >> we do have a position on containment, which is that we do not favor containment. >> he was kind of a surprise there from chuck hagel, probably not going to hurt his chances of confirmation, is even getting some republicans -- >> i think he's going to make it but if you have to clarify your clarification, you're in trouble, no. i mean if we compare, for instance, what he went through with what hillary clinton did with the ben
. grappling with a record debt and deficits, threat of global warming, threat of global poverty, pandemics, of national security challenges like continuing war on terrorism, instability of iran and north korea, rising powers, turmoil across the middle east, turmoil in north africa, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and the growing threat of cyber attacks. how we confront these problems, how we deal with these challenges will in many ways determine the future course of america. it will determine whether the united states will be a leader in the 21st century, or whether we will be just another failed empire in history. to succeed, we will depend on the resilience of our economy, the strength of our diplomatic and military institutions, and above all, the effectiveness of our political system. that underpins in many ways everything we do as a country. and that brings me to what i see as perhaps the most urgent task, facing this nation and facing all of us. and that is overcoming the partisan dysfunction in congress that poses a threat to our quality of life, to our national se
there are members here that agree, you got to address the larger deficit issue and to address a large deficit issue and my own experience having participated in every budget summit that we've had in past years, you got to be able to develop a balanced package in order to do that. that's just the nature of dealing with the size deficit -- size of deficits that you got. my preference, frankly, is that the congress would do the big deal, get it done, get this behind us, detrigger sequester, some this constant uncertainty, this month-to-month situation where we don't know what the hell we're going to get. that should end. in the absence of that deal, obviously i'll support whatever package you can put together to try to detrigger sequester. whatever you can do to make sure this doesn't happen. i mean, i cannot imagine that people would stand by and deliberately hurt this country in terms of our national defense by letting this take place. >> i'll only add briefly that most of the things we're doing are reversible. that is our goal, that they would be reversible. even if you reverse them it will take so
to the deficit. on that list of attendees for that meeting include marshall fitz from the center for american progress. ben jealous from the naacp and richard from the afl-cio. later in the day the president is meeting separately with a group of business leaders. that includes lloyd from goldman sachs, from yahoo and kent from coca-cola. congress has the next three and a half months to run up the deficit as much as it wants. the house and senate extended the debt ceiling. president obama has signed the no budget, no pay act of 2013. not only does that put off the nation's debt obligations until may 18th, it also withholds pay for a number of congressmen and womenless women unless they pass a budget by april. >>> eight senators have voted to block the violence against women act. that bill would protect victims of domestic violence and this particular version extends that care to illegal immigrants, native americans and lgbt members. senators who voted against considering that bill include ted cruz, marco rubio and rand paul, all republicans. more bill's up next. stay with us. to me now? you k
. you've got to address the larger deficit issue, and to address the larger deficit issue -- and my own experience. i've participated in every budget summit we have indiana past -- we have had in past years. you have to develop a balanced package. that's the nature of dealing with the size deficits you've got. and my preference, frankly, is that the congress would do the big deal, get it done, get this behind us, detrigger sequester, stop this constant uncertainty. this month-to-month situation where we don't know what the hell we're going to get. that should end. in the absence of that deal, obviously i'll support whatever package you can put together to try to detrigger sequester. whatever you can do to make sure this doesn't happen. i mean, i cannot imagine that people would stand by and deliberately hurt this country in terms of our national defense by letting this take place. >> i'll only add briefly that most of the things we're doing are reversible. that is our goal, they would be reversible, but even if you reverse them it will take some time -- and i can't predict that yet -- w
continues working on longer term deficit reduction. that's the sensible thing to do. why make-- why punish the american people because you haven't been able to achieve your ideological objectives through other means? >> sreenivasan: in another development, the associated press reported the u.s. military is cutting back from two aircraft carriers to one, in the persian gulf. the report cited u.s. officials who said it's a direct response to the looming, across-the-board cuts. u.s. and british regulators have fined the royal bank of scotland more than $610 million for manipulating a key interest rate. the u.s. commodity futures trading commission said today that r.b.s. made hundreds of attempts to manipulate the rate known as libor. it's a global benchmark for rates on everything from home mortgages to credit card payments. two other banks-- barclays and u.b.s.-- have already been fined for their roles in the scandal. wall street mostly stayed where it was today. the dow jones industrial average gained seven points to close at 13,986. the nasdaq fell three points to close at 3,168. those are
's come back and talk about it. >> if i am confirmed, a trust deficit between the committee and the cia would be wholly unacceptable to me. i like to think that mikan dore and bluntness will reassure you you will get straight answers from me, maybe not always the ones you like, but you will get answers and they will reflect my honest views. >> senator, you've been one of the most high-profile critics of the administration for not giving as much information particularly the legal documentation underpinning the targeting of u.s. citizens. is there a current trust deficit between the senate intelligence committee and the administration, and can someone like john brennan heal it or not? >> he did move in the right direction in a number of areas. i was very pleased when he said that if a mistake was made on a targeted killing matter, he'd make a public acknowledgement, something like that. i think he did take some steps in the right direction and the president did as well when he called on wednesday night and said he would reverse course and make additional materials available with respect t
there's no major catalysts in the market. we got that trade deficit number narrowest in three years. >> good numbers from china. >> if we can believe them. i don't know. depends how you feel about the numbers. still the numbers were there. that was some after what the market was chewing on today. but a low volume day. >> a lot of talk about apple. we're going go after apple in a second. everyone is talking about apple and its excess cash and what's going to happen and this lawsuit from mine einhorn. >> $137 billion dollar of excess cash. that's a lot of cash. should they be returning it to shareholders? einhorn says give it back to us in the form of preferred shares. he's filed this lawsuit. i think it's interesting really that apple even responded. so often you don't heart company say anything when all of this buzz is going around. i don't know what are going to do. i don't know what the right thing is to do. but i know they should make the shareholders feel like it's worth holding that stock. >> i think there's going to be a lot of movement on that. many thanks to cnbc's courtney
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 128 (some duplicates have been removed)